1
Celest 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't know, but I didn't see any genuine interest from those 3. At least 30% of that thread is just them spewing nonsense and insulting people. Even if they were non-agents, anyone that insists on insulting others so fervently is either a child and/or would turn into a retarded "flat earth" soldier anyway. To my mind, they don't deserve your time.

There is one downside, though: if they are agents and no one engages their retarded straw man points, those comments are gobbled up by deceived globers as truth, because they reinforce their beliefs.

But to answer your question, I think the modus operandi of agents is to tire you with relentless straw manning and gaslighting, while those genuinely deceived will concede in the face of evidence, just like we did.

1
Celest 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you really not understand that this "sussy boi" has no genuine interest in any of that and that its/his sole purpose is to flood FE posts with nonsense? Same with nignog1 and sapman. Just ignore/mock/block them.

0
Celest 0 points ago +1 / -1

You are using fallacious reasoning and I don't care to engage. What I care about is to show you the immediate facts. The rest you can figure out on your own.

Not all of us have as week of a mind as you.

Fantastic. You're the creme de la creme. Watch those videos with that critical eye of yours and tell me what you think.

Sad.

Don't be a child.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

I just think the flat-earthers should come with an alternative shape besides just saying it's flat

Sure, that's courtesy of the globe model, where everything's supposedly accounted for. We are reluctant to let go of that structure, especially when no clear alternative is available. However, and as I've said elsewhere, there's no way to determine Earth's shape without exploring more of it, which is forbidden. Nor can you know what lies beneath (or if it ever ends) if you can only drill up to a few miles. It's like living in a room your entire life and claiming to know what's outside.

I guarantee you the mathematicians can prove that the Earth is round

You can use math to fabricate/describe/make sense of any concept, but that doesn't make the concept real, and that's exactly what they did with the globe. Just think of physics engines (they're digital, intangible, but everything "makes sense", i.e., the math works out).

How about those surveying engineers?

Good question. I'd assume they know a thing or two. I don't know much about civil engineering, but I know it employs Euclidean geometry, as opposed to non-Euclidean (spheres, balls).

Either way, the more pressing question should be: why is there no curvature? Here's just one of the many videos that shows that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lLmW5Y8BFw

0
Celest 0 points ago +1 / -1

At some point, the mature thing to do is admit you were wrong :)

Yeah, it's about time you did that. Stop invoking unicorns.

Here, have a look:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4z6oWeHid0&t=23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Sx3rAdz2SA&t=24

Plug those numbers in a calculator (https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc) and judge for yourself how much of the bottom part of those islands should be missing (while none of it actually is).

More: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lLmW5Y8BFw

0
Celest 0 points ago +1 / -1

You cannot state as fact that what you see in the sky is the same type of object as what you're standing on. It is an assumption.

Have you seen the surface of any celestial body? That's impossible, no one has. All we've seen are images on a screen.

Planets appear as 2D circular objects; we don't have access to the depth dimension. There's no way to tell what those objects are and what their actual shape is. Thinking they're spherical (or concave/convex/flat discs) is, again, an assumption.

3
Celest 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't think anyone wants to listen after you try to make them feel stupid, e.g., "a bunch of indoctrinated monkeys".

4
Celest 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, those that did nothing but insult should've been removed from the discussion from the get-go.

3
Celest 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sure, throw a red herring in there for good measure.

No, the globe has never been circumnavigated N/S, only E/W. Same thing applies to the classic FE model. Have you even looked at a map of it?

2
Celest 2 points ago +3 / -1

Unlikely. As the saying goes: "once you go flat, you never go back", kinda like Santa.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep, creepy AF. The fact they've kept on improving LHC indicates their attempts at whatever it is they're doing have been successful enough for them to push forth.

6
Celest 6 points ago +7 / -1

This sure is gonna convince people to look into it!

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

It might just be the other way around: "going to the Moon" might have been necessary to "take a picture of the Earth".

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

"Welcome, kids, to mental gymnastics 101!"

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

We know that those in power have sought to discredit conspiracies, but this literary takes the cake.

You accidentally hit the nail on the head.

A planet is the perfect mental representation of a prison (the system), its warden (TPTB), its guards (goons/politicians), the prisoner (you) and your life sentence (endless servitude). Born into such a world, you are, by default, unable to form thoughts that see past it, because all thoughts have notions of "the world" intertwined within (i.e., the world is always at the back of your mind). Luckily, you weren't born in "that world", but were taught to believe that you were; as such, and if you care about the actual world, you can undo the programming, however painful that may be.

Why it matters (3:23).

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

No one knows its shape. When I say "it's level/flat", I refer to its surface; I can't make any assertions about its actual shape other than "it can be anything that allows for a level surface".

Similarly, in regards to its thickness, no one (AFAIK) has ever dug a hole deeper than the Kola Superdeep, which reaches a depth of 7.61 miles (12.2 km). Wikipedia says they couldn't dig deeper...

Because of higher-than-expected temperatures at this depth and location, 180 °C (356 °F) instead of the expected 100 °C (212 °F), drilling deeper was deemed unfeasible. The unexpected decrease in density, the greater porosity, and the unexpectedly high temperatures caused the rock to behave somewhat like a plastic, making drilling nearly impossible.

Regarding the outer perimeter, it is postulated that what we call Earth is contained within a crater-like hole, which would explain how water could accumulate to form oceans. On the classic FE model, the outer rim is the "ice wall", which is actually Antarctica. Could very well be, given the restrictions surrounding free exploration of Antarctica. None of us know what lies deep beyond the rim.

I suggest you disregard any claims about its "shape" (remember shape vs. surface), because that's impossible to establish with the information we have. Moreover, it is one of the main talking points of the all-too-famous "flat earth" psyop.

1
Celest 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have a similar thought-habit. If I feel like shit (usually the kind that results from lack of sleep), I'm convinced the entire world feels the same; if I feel great, I'm just as convinced the whole world (all life) feels great. Everything is perceived through that background mental state. Even with this knowledge, I still experience it as described.

4
Celest 4 points ago +4 / -0

why give kids nightmares?

It's questions like this that can wake one up.

If modern life is so great, why is it so poorly thought-out?

If you care so much about our well-being, why is it that you always do the opposite?

If people are so educated, why are they so uneducated?

If the police is there for us, why is it that their presence gives me the heebie-jibbies even though I've never done anything to harm another?

If I am of this place, why do I feel so viscerally out of place?

And on and on.

0
Celest 0 points ago +1 / -1

This is so strange. I discovered Math Powerland just yesterday by watching "Crazy Notion", where he goes over things most people here have been indoctrinated to ignore. This is from 2015, I believe.

Anyway, which set are you referring to?

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Either way, they're not using the LHC for what they're telling us. (Not that I know its actual purpose, though.)

view more: Next ›